Search
Search results
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated The Watch (2012) in Movies
Aug 7, 2019
On the surface, life for Evan (Ben Stiller), appears to be ideal. He has a very nice home, a loving wife, a solid job as in upper management for Costco, and is very active in his suburban Ohio community. But Evan’s life is about to take an unexpected change when the night watchman for the store is found brutally murdered, leaving Evan distraught. Unhappy with the efforts of the local police force, Evan decides to form a community watch to solve the crime and to protect his beloved community.
In the new comedy The Watch, Stiller teams with comedy veterans Vince Vaughn, Jonah Hill, and relative newcomer Richard Ayoade, who has had audience in stitches for the past three years on the phenomenally popular and funny British comedy The I.T. Crowd.
Vaughn plays Bob, a successful contractor who sees the neighborhood watch as an opportunity for some much needed guys’-nights-out. Bob’s wife travels often for work leaving him to watch over their teenage daughter who hs driven Bob to hysterical fits of extreme measures as he attempts to divert any unwanted male attention from her.
Hill plays Franklin, a unstable individual who still lives at home with his mother after flunking out of high school and failing every evaluation the police department entrance exam offered, especially the part concerning mental stability. Franklin views the watch as his opportunity to get back at the police force and to clean up the streets. Ayoade rounds out the group as Jamarcus who sees the group as his chance to get back into the social network and envisions calls from lonely women looking for protection as his golden opportunity.
As the group begins to bond, Evan becomes agitated as he is, by nature, an insecure individual who finds Bob’s growing popularity within the group to be a threat to him and his plan to solve the murder. Despite their initial awkwardness the team begins to make progress and discovers a much larger threat to the community in the form of a hostile alien force which is capable of assuming human identity. In a desperate race against time the watch must not only battle the alien threat but each other and their own insecurities and issues to come together and save the day.
The film was directed by Akiva Schaffer who made a name for himself as part of the Lonely Island Boys who’ve done some outrageously funny song parodies on Saturday Night Live as well as the film Superbad.
While there are some very funny moments in the film as well as some fun sci-fi action sequences, the talented cast appears to be playing it safe rather than going all out. Time and time again the cast appears to be holding back. This is not to say that they don’t have great moments. Unfortunately, the best parts of the film were ruined by the trailers. I spent the whole time waiting for things to be kicked to the next level which sadly never arrived.
There were some pacing issues with film as it dragged at times. There were also some plot holes but naturally with films of this type, a deep and complicated plot is not to be expected. In the end, while entertaining, the film was disappointing. It could’ve been so much more, especially with so much talent attached to it. Sadly pacing issues and a fairly generic plot lacking any real surprises keeps the film from reaching its potential.
In the new comedy The Watch, Stiller teams with comedy veterans Vince Vaughn, Jonah Hill, and relative newcomer Richard Ayoade, who has had audience in stitches for the past three years on the phenomenally popular and funny British comedy The I.T. Crowd.
Vaughn plays Bob, a successful contractor who sees the neighborhood watch as an opportunity for some much needed guys’-nights-out. Bob’s wife travels often for work leaving him to watch over their teenage daughter who hs driven Bob to hysterical fits of extreme measures as he attempts to divert any unwanted male attention from her.
Hill plays Franklin, a unstable individual who still lives at home with his mother after flunking out of high school and failing every evaluation the police department entrance exam offered, especially the part concerning mental stability. Franklin views the watch as his opportunity to get back at the police force and to clean up the streets. Ayoade rounds out the group as Jamarcus who sees the group as his chance to get back into the social network and envisions calls from lonely women looking for protection as his golden opportunity.
As the group begins to bond, Evan becomes agitated as he is, by nature, an insecure individual who finds Bob’s growing popularity within the group to be a threat to him and his plan to solve the murder. Despite their initial awkwardness the team begins to make progress and discovers a much larger threat to the community in the form of a hostile alien force which is capable of assuming human identity. In a desperate race against time the watch must not only battle the alien threat but each other and their own insecurities and issues to come together and save the day.
The film was directed by Akiva Schaffer who made a name for himself as part of the Lonely Island Boys who’ve done some outrageously funny song parodies on Saturday Night Live as well as the film Superbad.
While there are some very funny moments in the film as well as some fun sci-fi action sequences, the talented cast appears to be playing it safe rather than going all out. Time and time again the cast appears to be holding back. This is not to say that they don’t have great moments. Unfortunately, the best parts of the film were ruined by the trailers. I spent the whole time waiting for things to be kicked to the next level which sadly never arrived.
There were some pacing issues with film as it dragged at times. There were also some plot holes but naturally with films of this type, a deep and complicated plot is not to be expected. In the end, while entertaining, the film was disappointing. It could’ve been so much more, especially with so much talent attached to it. Sadly pacing issues and a fairly generic plot lacking any real surprises keeps the film from reaching its potential.
Kill the Father
8.5
Rate It
Book
'The rock cast a sharp, dark shadow over a shape huddled on the ground. Please don't let it be the...
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated The Da Vinci Code (2006) in Movies
Aug 14, 2019
No film since “The Last Temptation of Christ” has invoked as much controversy as The Da Vinci Code based on the book of the same name by Dan Brown. Prior to the film even being screened for the press, cries ran out to ban the film and its message that some find blasphemous. Fortunately calmer heads have prevailed and the film by Director Ron Howard has arrived in a wash of media frenzy not seen since Mel Gibson’s The Passion of the Christ.
If you are seeing a pattern forming, you would be correct as it seems that few topics can raise ire and wrath more than the topic of religion, especially if the film proposes a viewpoint that differs from the traditional beliefs that are given by the church, bible, and history.
In the film, a monk appears to murder an elderly man who with his last ounces of strength, manages to leave a cryptic riddle on his body. The bizarre nature of the crime prompts French police inspector Fache (Jean Reno) to travel to the Louvre to investigate the crime. A clue at the crime scene causes the police to summer Robert Langdon (Tom Hanks) from a lecture hall where he is signing his latest book on symbols. Since the deceased was supposed to meet Langdon earlier in the day Langdon has fallen under suspicion for the crime.
As he attempts to decipher the message at the crime scene, Langdon encounters a police cryptologists named Sophie (Audrey Tautou), who informs Robert that he is in danger and soon the duo are fleeing from the police after deciphering some hidden clues at the crime scene.
Before either Robert or Audrey knows what is happening, they are being accused of multiple murders and on the run. As the clues begin to mount, the mystery takes an even stranger turn by the discovery of an artifact that when unlocked, should contain a map.
Seeking refuge and help, the duo arrive at the estate of Sir Leigh Teabing (Sir Ian Mc Kellen), who proceeds to tell Robert and Sophie that the clues they have uncovered are part of a cover-up that segments of the church will stop at nothing to keep secret. The nature of this secret is such that should it become public knowledge, then they very foundations of history, faith, and the church could be shaken to their core.
As the mystery becomes clearer, the group are attacked by a Monk named Silas (Paul Bettany), who has been doing the violent work of someone know as The Teacher in an effort to discover the location of artifacts and those attempting to uncover the mystery.
What follows is a frantic race that travels from Paris to London in an effort to get to the bottom of the mystery and unravel the true nature of the mystery and the secret that people are willing to kill for in order to protect.
While some may find the mystery, the players, and their motivations confusing, the film does grab hold and moves along at a solid pace. Ron Howard once again shows his skill by directing a film that is different from his other works, yet rich in its visuals and complexity. The scenic locales of the film enhance the mystery (For those who have not read the book), as they attempt to decipher the clues along with the characters.
The work from the cast was solid as Hanks gives a very good if restrained performance in his portrayal. Mc Kellen is a very nice blend of elegance and old world charm that lifts up every scene in which he is in.
While there are those who will lambaste the film for the message it provides, I chose to look at it as a film that does what movies should, entertain and make you think. The film is not saying its assertions are hard and cold facts, what it is doing is providing a vehicle for debate.
In college I was told that through debate comes knowledge and growth for a society. This was common in ancient Greek and Roman society where issues of the day would be debated in open forums. It seems that we as a society have become too insistent to take things at face value and have forgotten that the very nature of the human experience is to question, grow, and seek our own answers. As such the film is a great example of how Hollywood at times gets it right and provides solid entertainment that will stimulate as well as entertain.
If you are seeing a pattern forming, you would be correct as it seems that few topics can raise ire and wrath more than the topic of religion, especially if the film proposes a viewpoint that differs from the traditional beliefs that are given by the church, bible, and history.
In the film, a monk appears to murder an elderly man who with his last ounces of strength, manages to leave a cryptic riddle on his body. The bizarre nature of the crime prompts French police inspector Fache (Jean Reno) to travel to the Louvre to investigate the crime. A clue at the crime scene causes the police to summer Robert Langdon (Tom Hanks) from a lecture hall where he is signing his latest book on symbols. Since the deceased was supposed to meet Langdon earlier in the day Langdon has fallen under suspicion for the crime.
As he attempts to decipher the message at the crime scene, Langdon encounters a police cryptologists named Sophie (Audrey Tautou), who informs Robert that he is in danger and soon the duo are fleeing from the police after deciphering some hidden clues at the crime scene.
Before either Robert or Audrey knows what is happening, they are being accused of multiple murders and on the run. As the clues begin to mount, the mystery takes an even stranger turn by the discovery of an artifact that when unlocked, should contain a map.
Seeking refuge and help, the duo arrive at the estate of Sir Leigh Teabing (Sir Ian Mc Kellen), who proceeds to tell Robert and Sophie that the clues they have uncovered are part of a cover-up that segments of the church will stop at nothing to keep secret. The nature of this secret is such that should it become public knowledge, then they very foundations of history, faith, and the church could be shaken to their core.
As the mystery becomes clearer, the group are attacked by a Monk named Silas (Paul Bettany), who has been doing the violent work of someone know as The Teacher in an effort to discover the location of artifacts and those attempting to uncover the mystery.
What follows is a frantic race that travels from Paris to London in an effort to get to the bottom of the mystery and unravel the true nature of the mystery and the secret that people are willing to kill for in order to protect.
While some may find the mystery, the players, and their motivations confusing, the film does grab hold and moves along at a solid pace. Ron Howard once again shows his skill by directing a film that is different from his other works, yet rich in its visuals and complexity. The scenic locales of the film enhance the mystery (For those who have not read the book), as they attempt to decipher the clues along with the characters.
The work from the cast was solid as Hanks gives a very good if restrained performance in his portrayal. Mc Kellen is a very nice blend of elegance and old world charm that lifts up every scene in which he is in.
While there are those who will lambaste the film for the message it provides, I chose to look at it as a film that does what movies should, entertain and make you think. The film is not saying its assertions are hard and cold facts, what it is doing is providing a vehicle for debate.
In college I was told that through debate comes knowledge and growth for a society. This was common in ancient Greek and Roman society where issues of the day would be debated in open forums. It seems that we as a society have become too insistent to take things at face value and have forgotten that the very nature of the human experience is to question, grow, and seek our own answers. As such the film is a great example of how Hollywood at times gets it right and provides solid entertainment that will stimulate as well as entertain.
Jamie (131 KP) rated Little Lies in Books
Jul 26, 2017
Extremely predictable (2 more)
Unlikeable main character
Poor representation of social workers
The worst social worker ever
What bothered me the most about this book was how poor of a representation Ellen Moore is of a social worker. Just think, if it was you or your own children that were involved in a case, would you want the CPS worker talking to other people idly about it? Carelessly giving personal information out even years after the case has been closed? Of course not. It would go against the code of ethics. A considerable portion of the story involved Ellen discussing a previous case involving a now grown child to multiple people, some that were involved in the case and some not. Then there’s the added bonus that Ellen ends up investigating a murder right along with buddy cop, adding her own opinions and speculations on the case without doing any actual police work. One of her theories involved said child from a previous case, which is quite frankly ridiculous and a serious violation of the code. I personally found this portrayal of social workers to be incredibly irresponsible.
I also wasn’t digging the pseudo romance between Ellen and the police officer. Ellen is supposed to be happily married with children, yet keeps going back to how she’s sure that mister cop is sweet on her, and how awkward it is even though they’re close friends. I rolled my eyes when she felt guilty not telling her husband about the not date at a diner to look at crime scene photos and discuss a case. This extra bit of fluff just made Ellen’s character more of an annoyance to me.
The plot tries really hard to set up a classic bait and switch in order to throw readers off the trail and make the reveal at the end that much more surprising and exciting, but it was so painfully obvious it just seemed amateurish. A let down, really, considering how much I loved one of Gudenkauf’s previous works, The Weight of Silence. This story felt so shallow in comparison. Taking it as an introduction to the characters in Little Mercies, well, I’m not sure if I’d want to pick up the full length novel after reading this and that’s a shame. Overall, this little novella was disappointing and could easily be skipped.
I also wasn’t digging the pseudo romance between Ellen and the police officer. Ellen is supposed to be happily married with children, yet keeps going back to how she’s sure that mister cop is sweet on her, and how awkward it is even though they’re close friends. I rolled my eyes when she felt guilty not telling her husband about the not date at a diner to look at crime scene photos and discuss a case. This extra bit of fluff just made Ellen’s character more of an annoyance to me.
The plot tries really hard to set up a classic bait and switch in order to throw readers off the trail and make the reveal at the end that much more surprising and exciting, but it was so painfully obvious it just seemed amateurish. A let down, really, considering how much I loved one of Gudenkauf’s previous works, The Weight of Silence. This story felt so shallow in comparison. Taking it as an introduction to the characters in Little Mercies, well, I’m not sure if I’d want to pick up the full length novel after reading this and that’s a shame. Overall, this little novella was disappointing and could easily be skipped.
Louise (64 KP) rated Surviving Execution in Books
Jun 28, 2018
First off thank you to readers first for a copy of this book.
Surviving execution is the true story of Richard Glossip, a man who is on death row for a crime he never committed. Richard Glossip’s story is told by Ian Woods a UK Sky news reporter, Ian wanted to bring this to the UK’s attention of the miscarriage of justice and how capital punishment is not always as straight forward as it’s made out to be.
Richard Glossip was arrested for the murder of his boss and motel owner Barry Von Treese, however Richard was not the person that killed him but was implicated by Justin Sneed and the police who interviewed him. For this the man who actually murdered Barry Von Treese got life without parole whilst Richard gets the death penalty for being the supposed mastermind.
Richards Glossip didn’t start off well with a bad lawyer that was under qualified for this type of case and failure to bringing certain evidence to light was going to cost Richard his life. With multiple trials, appeals and stays you would hope this man would get some sort of break, however that’s not the case and shows how corrupt the police and the law can be.
Also this book tells us a bit about the history of Capital Punishment, the methods, the countries and also the abolitionists. Although this is non fiction it is really easy to digest and very much the page turner. It makes you question so many things and whether this should really still be carried out.
We also get an insight in to what Ian Woods is thinking as he is helping this mans case and whether he would or could witness the death of a man that he has come to know and call a friend. Ian tries to remain unbiased especially when asked if he thinks Richard is guilty which infuriates others helping with the case. This case got some high coverage as Richard Branson, Susan Sarandon, Sister Helen Prejean and even the Pope got involved.
I would really recommend reading this book if you are interested in true crime and capital punishment. Maybe just read this book so you can decide if the state of Oklahoma was correct in giving this man the death penalty.
Surviving execution is the true story of Richard Glossip, a man who is on death row for a crime he never committed. Richard Glossip’s story is told by Ian Woods a UK Sky news reporter, Ian wanted to bring this to the UK’s attention of the miscarriage of justice and how capital punishment is not always as straight forward as it’s made out to be.
Richard Glossip was arrested for the murder of his boss and motel owner Barry Von Treese, however Richard was not the person that killed him but was implicated by Justin Sneed and the police who interviewed him. For this the man who actually murdered Barry Von Treese got life without parole whilst Richard gets the death penalty for being the supposed mastermind.
Richards Glossip didn’t start off well with a bad lawyer that was under qualified for this type of case and failure to bringing certain evidence to light was going to cost Richard his life. With multiple trials, appeals and stays you would hope this man would get some sort of break, however that’s not the case and shows how corrupt the police and the law can be.
Also this book tells us a bit about the history of Capital Punishment, the methods, the countries and also the abolitionists. Although this is non fiction it is really easy to digest and very much the page turner. It makes you question so many things and whether this should really still be carried out.
We also get an insight in to what Ian Woods is thinking as he is helping this mans case and whether he would or could witness the death of a man that he has come to know and call a friend. Ian tries to remain unbiased especially when asked if he thinks Richard is guilty which infuriates others helping with the case. This case got some high coverage as Richard Branson, Susan Sarandon, Sister Helen Prejean and even the Pope got involved.
I would really recommend reading this book if you are interested in true crime and capital punishment. Maybe just read this book so you can decide if the state of Oklahoma was correct in giving this man the death penalty.
Hazel (2934 KP) rated The Man on the Roof in Books
Jul 1, 2018
Hmmmm ... if I could only use one word to describe this book, it would be ... frustrating! Now don't get me wrong, it's not a bad book, it's just infuriatingly annoying. Let me try and explain.
The story is basically about the murder of a young lad found suspended from a banner in a cul-de-sac of houses where we find the main suspects who, we learn, all have secrets that they don't want to come out. In comes the police to investigate the crime and the various suspects that live in the cul-de-sac. Sounds ok so far however, therein lies the problem. There are so many suspects, none of which are particularly likeable, it was difficult to keep track of who was who and who was married to who and as the secrets were revealed, whose secret was it! In addition, each of the chapters is written in different styles from different people and you don't always know who the people are ... I ended up being very confused. There's lots of description and whilst some of it is good, e.g. people's gestures and behaviour, a lot of it is unnecessary and this makes it a very long book ... well it seemed long to me.
There are some inconsistencies as well which I found annoying. For example, the names of the police officers change ... one minute they were Detective Cady Lambert and Detective Braidey Fitzsimmons and then they were Cady and Braidey and then they were Lambert and Fitzsimmons ... this may seem trivial but when you have so many characters, it's hard to keep track so changing their names throughout causes you to lose the thread of who is who.
Now don't get me wrong, as I said this isn't a bad book, it actually has the bones of being an excellent dark and gritty thriller but there's just too much going on that affects the flow of reading for me and I just think it needs tidying up.
I am grateful to the author for sending me a copy of his book after finding my blog. I really appreciate the time and effort he has made in writing a complex story and putting it out there for people like me, who couldn't write a decent letter, to criticise and pick apart ... that is brave and I salute you Mr Stephenson and encourage you to keep going.
The story is basically about the murder of a young lad found suspended from a banner in a cul-de-sac of houses where we find the main suspects who, we learn, all have secrets that they don't want to come out. In comes the police to investigate the crime and the various suspects that live in the cul-de-sac. Sounds ok so far however, therein lies the problem. There are so many suspects, none of which are particularly likeable, it was difficult to keep track of who was who and who was married to who and as the secrets were revealed, whose secret was it! In addition, each of the chapters is written in different styles from different people and you don't always know who the people are ... I ended up being very confused. There's lots of description and whilst some of it is good, e.g. people's gestures and behaviour, a lot of it is unnecessary and this makes it a very long book ... well it seemed long to me.
There are some inconsistencies as well which I found annoying. For example, the names of the police officers change ... one minute they were Detective Cady Lambert and Detective Braidey Fitzsimmons and then they were Cady and Braidey and then they were Lambert and Fitzsimmons ... this may seem trivial but when you have so many characters, it's hard to keep track so changing their names throughout causes you to lose the thread of who is who.
Now don't get me wrong, as I said this isn't a bad book, it actually has the bones of being an excellent dark and gritty thriller but there's just too much going on that affects the flow of reading for me and I just think it needs tidying up.
I am grateful to the author for sending me a copy of his book after finding my blog. I really appreciate the time and effort he has made in writing a complex story and putting it out there for people like me, who couldn't write a decent letter, to criticise and pick apart ... that is brave and I salute you Mr Stephenson and encourage you to keep going.
Matthew Krueger (10051 KP) rated Lethal Weapon 3 (1992) in Movies
Jul 10, 2020 (Updated Jul 10, 2020)
The Perfect Trio : Mel, Danny and Joe
Lethal Weapon 3- i love the chemistry between Mel, Danny and Joe. Its the perfect trio, their bounce off of each other. The comedy is excellent. The one liners are good. The action is good, the plot is good.
The plot: Veteran police detective Roger Murtaugh (Danny Glover) is only days away from retiring when he and his tough partner, Martin Riggs (Mel Gibson), are roped into an important internal affairs case. Working with the beautiful, no-nonsense Sergeant Lorna Cole (Rene Russo) and aided by the shifty informant Leo Getz (Joe Pesci), Murtaugh and Riggs begin to close in on a black-market weapons operation involving corrupt cop and arms dealer Jack Travis (Stuart Wilson).
Director Richard Donner is an animal-rights and pro-choice activist, and placed many posters and stickers for these causes in the film. Of note are the T-shirt worn by one of Murtaugh's daughters (the actress's idea), an 18-wheeler with an anti-fur slogan on the side, and a sticker on a locker in the police station.
Director Richard Donner demanded some big changes on the script which included changing the original character of Lorna (who had a different name in earlier drafts) into a woman and turning her into Riggs's girlfriend. He also re-worked the script to be less story-oriented and not focus on the main villains but instead on the relationship between Riggs and Murtaugh. He also toned down action scenes from the script and brought back Leo Getz into the story. All of his scenes were written in afterwards. In the original script Leo had left L.A. for New York. Boam had some disagreements with changes that Donner made but he was not against them. Boam was fired after he wrote his first two drafts of the script. One of the reasons for this was because Donner wasn't interested in the script and he disagreed with some parts of Boam's original draft.
Carrie Fisher was an uncredited script doctor on the film.
Several versions of a Lethal Weapon video game were released in conjunction with this sequel's release, appearing on the NES, SNES, Game Boy, Amiga, Atari ST, and Commodore 64 platforms. Also released was a Lethal Weapon 3 pinball game.
Its a funny entertaining movie, on to the last one in the franchise. I've loved the franchise so far and hopefully the 4th one is good.
The plot: Veteran police detective Roger Murtaugh (Danny Glover) is only days away from retiring when he and his tough partner, Martin Riggs (Mel Gibson), are roped into an important internal affairs case. Working with the beautiful, no-nonsense Sergeant Lorna Cole (Rene Russo) and aided by the shifty informant Leo Getz (Joe Pesci), Murtaugh and Riggs begin to close in on a black-market weapons operation involving corrupt cop and arms dealer Jack Travis (Stuart Wilson).
Director Richard Donner is an animal-rights and pro-choice activist, and placed many posters and stickers for these causes in the film. Of note are the T-shirt worn by one of Murtaugh's daughters (the actress's idea), an 18-wheeler with an anti-fur slogan on the side, and a sticker on a locker in the police station.
Director Richard Donner demanded some big changes on the script which included changing the original character of Lorna (who had a different name in earlier drafts) into a woman and turning her into Riggs's girlfriend. He also re-worked the script to be less story-oriented and not focus on the main villains but instead on the relationship between Riggs and Murtaugh. He also toned down action scenes from the script and brought back Leo Getz into the story. All of his scenes were written in afterwards. In the original script Leo had left L.A. for New York. Boam had some disagreements with changes that Donner made but he was not against them. Boam was fired after he wrote his first two drafts of the script. One of the reasons for this was because Donner wasn't interested in the script and he disagreed with some parts of Boam's original draft.
Carrie Fisher was an uncredited script doctor on the film.
Several versions of a Lethal Weapon video game were released in conjunction with this sequel's release, appearing on the NES, SNES, Game Boy, Amiga, Atari ST, and Commodore 64 platforms. Also released was a Lethal Weapon 3 pinball game.
Its a funny entertaining movie, on to the last one in the franchise. I've loved the franchise so far and hopefully the 4th one is good.
A Guide to National Security: Threats, Responses and Strategies
Book
A Guide to National Security offers an analysis of the threats and policy responses facing the UK,...
BookInspector (124 KP) rated The Chosen Ones in Books
Sep 24, 2020
Police detective Ian Bradshaw is assigned a case where it is believed, that five women are missing. He calls two journalists, Tom and Helen, to help him solve this case. I really liked that the author doesn’t leave these cases only to the police but also involves other people to help. I think, that there is no single main character in this book, Ian, Tom and Helen are equally important in this novel. I really loved that this book is told from multiple perspectives, allowing to understand the characters and to have a glimpse into different minds and lives. Even though it is told by multiple people, the mystery and suspense were very well kept throughout the book. I don’t think I could single out my favourite character, I think they all have very intriguing personalities, and I quickly warmed up to all the important characters in this book.
The narrative is very well developed in this novel. There is more than one investigation happening, and I think that made the whole book even richer and more absorbing. I really liked all the twists and turns this story had to offer, and I believe, the author really knows how to sidetrack the reader. The narrative kept changing continuously, depending on the character, that is why this book was a real page turner to me.
The writing style was very creative, but at the same time enjoyable and easy to read. The chapters are very well constructed and have a decent length, so for me, the pages just flew by. This book is fourth in the series, and it does carry quite a bit of information from the previous books, and I wish I read them before this one, however, I was able to understand of what was going on. So, you can read it as a stand alone, but I would recommend reading the previous books first. I really liked the way this book ended, it answered all my questions and gave a glimpse of what to come in the next book, which I will be looking out for.
So, to conclude, this book is dark, claustrophobic, and very gripping, filled with very well developed characters, absorbing plot and plenty of twists. I thoroughly enjoyed it, and I hope you will give it a try and will like it as much as I did.
The narrative is very well developed in this novel. There is more than one investigation happening, and I think that made the whole book even richer and more absorbing. I really liked all the twists and turns this story had to offer, and I believe, the author really knows how to sidetrack the reader. The narrative kept changing continuously, depending on the character, that is why this book was a real page turner to me.
The writing style was very creative, but at the same time enjoyable and easy to read. The chapters are very well constructed and have a decent length, so for me, the pages just flew by. This book is fourth in the series, and it does carry quite a bit of information from the previous books, and I wish I read them before this one, however, I was able to understand of what was going on. So, you can read it as a stand alone, but I would recommend reading the previous books first. I really liked the way this book ended, it answered all my questions and gave a glimpse of what to come in the next book, which I will be looking out for.
So, to conclude, this book is dark, claustrophobic, and very gripping, filled with very well developed characters, absorbing plot and plenty of twists. I thoroughly enjoyed it, and I hope you will give it a try and will like it as much as I did.
Mark @ Carstairs Considers (2357 KP) rated Judge Thee Not in Books
Sep 13, 2019
I’m Still Trying to Judge My Reaction to This Book
Midwife Rose Carroll is surprised to step into the Amesbury, Mass., post office one June afternoon and find Mayme Settle complaining loudly about postmistress Bertie Winslow. The problem isn’t poor service but Bertie’s untraditional lifestyle, specifically that she lives with another woman. Mrs. Settle doesn’t feel this is proper, and is making her feelings known. While Rose is upset for her friend, Bertie is more than willing to let the slight go. However, one morning Mrs. Settle is found dead in her bed, and the police are quick to rule it murder. Unfortunately, they are just as quick to focus on Bertie as their prime suspect. Can Rose help the police find the truth?
The mystery is good with several viable suspects; however, I felt the pacing was off. It was a bit too slow in the beginning and a bit rushed at the end. While it wraps everything up, we get a lot of information thrown at us rather quickly to do so. It is always fun to spend time with Rose, and I love her friends. There were some interesting developments with her family in this book, which I enjoyed. The suspects were strong, but I felt the victim was a bit of a cliché, needing more time alive to become more real to me. My feelings on the victim also plays into my issues with the theme. As the title suggests, we get a few passages that look at how humans judge others. The problem was I felt these were too modern for a book set in the 1880’s. Mind you, I haven’t done the research, so maybe I’m the one judging too harshly. Other viewpoints were certainly not shown as anything other than wrong, and Rose comes off as almost judging others a few times herself. The title comes from a version in Matthew 7 in the Bible, and is taken out of context, as it usually is. These issues pulled me out of the book (and certainly bothered me) when they popped up, but the focus of the book was mostly on the mystery. Those who have enjoyed previous books will want to pick up this book and judge it for themselves. Most will probably be glad they did.
The mystery is good with several viable suspects; however, I felt the pacing was off. It was a bit too slow in the beginning and a bit rushed at the end. While it wraps everything up, we get a lot of information thrown at us rather quickly to do so. It is always fun to spend time with Rose, and I love her friends. There were some interesting developments with her family in this book, which I enjoyed. The suspects were strong, but I felt the victim was a bit of a cliché, needing more time alive to become more real to me. My feelings on the victim also plays into my issues with the theme. As the title suggests, we get a few passages that look at how humans judge others. The problem was I felt these were too modern for a book set in the 1880’s. Mind you, I haven’t done the research, so maybe I’m the one judging too harshly. Other viewpoints were certainly not shown as anything other than wrong, and Rose comes off as almost judging others a few times herself. The title comes from a version in Matthew 7 in the Bible, and is taken out of context, as it usually is. These issues pulled me out of the book (and certainly bothered me) when they popped up, but the focus of the book was mostly on the mystery. Those who have enjoyed previous books will want to pick up this book and judge it for themselves. Most will probably be glad they did.